1nterceptor

Interesting article:

"North America’s love for the car and large government subsidization resulted in the masses flocking to cars. So much so that driving is now considered to be a birthright in America - even minimum-wage workers can often afford their own cars. It is not uncommon to hear stories about people who are out of work and living on government assistance who are devastated that they might have to give up their car."

https://www.theurbancountry.com/2012/...d-freedom.html

Smallwheels

Would people over the age of thirty who previously owned a car and then decided that they weren't worth the effort and money be considered failures? Most people don't see the world the way we see it. One day they might though that won't be soon.

I'm glad I read the article. It gave me some ideas to mention in future conversations and future videos about the high price of automobiles.

dynodonn 

Locally, getting around by auto is the fastest and easiest form of transportation, and anyone walking, riding a bike or using mass transit as a main means of transportation, is either consider an environmentalist, poor, or a loon.

gerv 

Yeah.. that's why everyone in the US is griping about $4 gas. At a certain point reality will kick in though.

ubringliten

This article doesn't surprise me. I always feel that motorists treat bicyclists as second class citizens, pests, nuisances, etc. People are so mainstream that they don't think for themselves. Everything is given from the media and stigmatism. I am going to the best college, get an MBA. When I graduate I am going to make this much, buy a large home, a new shiny car, and be the most popular person on Facebook.

A few years ago I met this Nobel Laureate and he said that he commutes to work by biking and I was thinking to myself why is he doing that? He was a person with huge status. Before he was a CEO of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (#1 in cancer research hospital), he was head of National Institute of Health appointed Bill Clinton, and currently he's head of National Cancer Institute appointed by Obama. I wonder what people thought about him riding his bike to work in NYC with no bike lanes. Right then, I knew biking was special.

Dahon.Steve

Good article. Thanks for posting.

I didn't know Margaret Thathcher said that remark about people over thirty not having cars. LOL! I was a little over thirty when becoming car free and never regretted that decision. I watched a film by her just yesterday with Merrill Streep playing her role. You have to understand that Thathcher was a conservative who did not care much for public transit.

You also have to understand that Ms Thathcher was from a generation where motor transport was cheap. Not anymore. Quite frankly, people who are really "Losing" are those who are spending 20 percent or more on motor transport.

swwhite

Doctor Paul Dudley White, well-known cardiologist and personal physician to Dwight Eisenhower, was a bit of a biker.

I think that anyone over the age of 30 who has figured out that we need exercise and biking is a good way to work it into daily life, is a success.

Pobble.808

This may be reading a little too much into it, but Thatcher did say "bus," not "public trans" or "train" or bike," and my sense is that even among us open-minded BF folk there are some who see the bus as a distinct step down from all other transportation modes (except maybe SUVs ) -- various comments over the years about how buses have too many smelly / noisy/ wacko people. So maybe Thatcher would cut cyclists and train riders a little more slack, for whatver that's worth, which probably isn't much.

Be that as it may, last week I saw a movie, "Jiro Dreams of Sushi," about the revered proprietor of what is supposed to be Tokyo's top sushi restaurant, where dinner starts at $375 a pop, and it showed him riding the train to work every day. His 50-something son and heir apparent does the daily supply run to pick up fish from the wholesale market -- and carries it back to the restaurant on the rack of his (rod-brake-equipped) bike. Hard to imagine anything like this happening at a top flight restaurant in Manhattan or San Fran!

folder fanatic

Actually, when a man (even a woman) who reaches that point in life (usually around 30) wants to "settle down" and be a part of the mainstream uses (yes, I mean uses) a car to appear attractive to a potential mate, and an equally or even more important, right level of employment way beyond McDonald's and Walmart level. That means the right designer new clothes (not thrift shop finds), nice home/condo/land ownership, and a new or late model car. Until society vastly changes (and that might take a very long time), expect people to pay lip service to a car free lifestyle with minimal possessions and actually live the lie and chooses freely & prefers to do so.

krobinson103

I'm 38 and despite my wifes requests that I 'settle down' and be boring like everyone else I refuse. The only way I commute is on 2 wheels, be it bike or motorcycle. I would disagree with the failure statement as well. If being successfully self employed, owning a 4 story building, having 2 kids and a wife counts as being a failure then I'm in the club. To me cars are worthless expensive things that I use when I have no choice in the matter.

Roody

I wonder if most people are aware of how much their cars are subsidized by the government.

Especially I wonder if Margaret Thatcher's political heirs (like the Tea Party folks) know that their taxes are higher to pay for cars. How do they support this fact within their philosophy of cutting all taxes--even when it means cutting services to the poor, the elderly, children, and other vulnerable people. Is there an element of hypocrisy here, or are they just unaware of these expensive car subsidies?

Tundra_Man 

Don't forget about the assumption that we've lost our drivers license due to a DUI.

doc0c

Fiscal conservatives are in favor of tax cuts in order to accomplish a couple of things:
1. reduce the size and scope of government
2. increase personal wealth
I'll assume you can form a thought and arrive at further conclusions from those two points.

Such folks never claimed to not care about the people who are truly in need of help.
Such folks also realize that they will have to sacrifice a lot of things through this process as well.
I know because I'm of the same mindset.

Lastly, there is no way achieve these goals in the near future.

BloNoBikeGuy

Oh man... I guess I'm a failure.

Mos6502

The problem is the government will cut funding to necessities before they cut anything that would actually meaningfully cut back the size or scope of the government. If you think the government is going to allow itself to be starved of tax money to the point where it is actually willing to make necessary cuts to its own size - then you obviously have not paid much to attention government debt over the past decade. Heck as debt has mushroomed they've been thinking of any idea, no matter how hair brained, to justify making the government even larger.

But I digress, this is maybe too political for this sub forum.

Roody

Maybe it's because I'm too stupid to form a thought, but I'm not seeing here whether you think of cutting automobile subsidies. And in the national debate, I'm not aware of ANY sacrifices that Tea Partiers are prepared to make.

Congressional Republicans held up the Transportation Bill for more than a year because they wanted to cut proposed spending on non-automotive transit (which benefits mainly poorer people and big city Democrats)--but they never suggested any cuts to the infrastructure that THEY use.

Dahon.Steve

I think the last statement is correct.

The U.S. government does not receive enough tax dollars to pay for wars and social programs anymore. It's only a matter of time before this house of cards falls. I happen to belive the last fiscal conservative we had was Dwight Eisenhower. Yes, that long ago!

This is why I bellieve public transit will be the economic savior of the middle class. Personal wealth has been in decline the past 30 years. I see nothing changing this today or in the future.

MattFoley

Because don't you know, roads are freeeeee!!!

Dahon.Steve

As a person who uses bus, subway and lightrail each day, it depends on which is a step down. The express bus I take is actually a "step up" from lightrail during rush hour because it's less crowded the people who use it are professionals. Keep in mind, the bus IS public transportation for the majority of the world. There are commuter rail, subway and lighrail are in the minority when compared to the numerous bus lines serving the public.

I don't see why one should be considered lower than the other.

Mos6502

Perhaps because in general buses are less efficient people movers than rail systems. But I think the comment was in jest anyway.

AdrianFly

Maggie Thatcher's statements only apply to the misguided people that believe them.

For instance, in Jonestown if you did not drink the Kool-aid you were a failure.

History has shown that using psychology on human beings can produce beneficial results..believe it or not. Largely affected are the vulnerable, impressionable and dare I say... weak minded and insecure. End result is a miserable treadmill lifestyle, arrogance fueled by denial.

downtube42

According to Wikiquote this is misattributed to Thatcher. Which is not pertinent to most of this conversation; however, getting basic facts wrong goes a long way to undermining a position.

Chesha Neko

The way I see it I am settled down. Single and celibate. No dependents, no exes, no interpersonal drama. No car bleeding me dry. I can relax and work on growing my beard.

wahoonc

and contemplate your navel

Aaron

krobinson103

Relax? Not happening with 2 small kids, a wife and a busy teaching schedule. I think I've forgotten what relax means.